Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Clipia

by io.github.clipia-ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

edit_presentation

Edit an EXISTING presentation instead of regenerating it: change slide text, title, theme, add/remove/reorder slides. The deck is rebuilt from its saved spec and previously generated illustrations are reused without another illustration charge, so a text fix costs only the small render fee. Use it for ANY change request about a deck that already exists; generate_presentation is only for a brand-new deck. All "index" values are 0-based positions in the CURRENT deck. An illustration is redrawn (and billed) ONLY if you change that slide's image.prompt, list it in regenerate_images, or set regenerate_all_images=true. Returns request_id (prs_*) — poll with wait_generation until COMPLETED.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "edit_presentation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
themeNoNew theme slug (same values as generate_presentation).
titleNoNew deck title.
slidesNoSlide operations, applied in the order set → delete → insert → move.
work_idNoPresentation work id to edit. Omit to edit the latest completed deck of this account.
languageNoNew content language.
regenerate_imagesNo0-based indexes (current deck) of slides whose illustration must be redrawn even though its prompt did not change. Each one costs credits.
regenerate_all_imagesNoRedraw every illustration ("replace all the images"). Full illustration price — never for a text-only edit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only declare the safety profile (not read-only, not idempotent, not destructive); the description adds substantive behavior: the deck is rebuilt from a saved spec, existing illustrations are reused to avoid a second illustration charge, only a small render fee applies for text fixes, and the call is asynchronous returning a request_id to poll with wait_generation. That is real value beyond the annotations, though it omits prerequisites (ownership/permissions) and any failure modes for an invalid index.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core distinction from generate_presentation, then moves to billing, indexing, and return handling in a logical order. The cost/charge point is restated two or three times (illustration reuse, redraw billing, regenerate_all_images), which is slightly redundant but arguably defensive for a paid operation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it edits, when to choose it, which actions incur extra cost, index conventions and operation ordering, and the async return/next step (request_id → wait_generation). Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description still earns a bump by clarifying that all "index" values are 0-based positions in the CURRENT deck and that operations are applied in a fixed order, which the schema only mentions in passing. It reinforces the billing semantics of image.prompt and regenerate_images, but does not explain work_id/theme/language beyond schema text.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ("Edit an EXISTING presentation") and enumerates the operations it covers: text, title, theme, add/remove/reorder slides. It explicitly separates itself from the sibling generate_presentation, so an agent can pick the right tool without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit routing rule — "Use it for ANY change request about a deck that already exists; generate_presentation is only for a brand-new deck" — which is exactly the when/when-not/alternative structure. It also states the condition governing regeneration billing (change image.prompt, list regenerate_images, or set regenerate_all_images=true), so the agent knows when a costlier path is triggered.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Clipia toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources